From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Gunthorpe Subject: Re: Status of RXE/Soft-RoCE driver? Date: Mon, 2 May 2016 12:40:05 -0600 Message-ID: <20160502184005.GA32613@obsidianresearch.com> References: <20160428115653.GB21343@leon.nu> <5722C24B.6020108@redhat.com> <20160429051755.GC774@leon.nu> <20160429205434.GA11286@obsidianresearch.com> <20160430072847.GB25593@leon.nu> <572725E0.4090303@dev.mellanox.co.il> <20160502175709.GA31976@obsidianresearch.com> <20160502183151.GA6462@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160502183151.GA6462-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Yishai Hadas , Doug Ledford , leon-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, Or Gerlitz , Moni Shoua , Sagi Grimberg , Robert LeBlanc , "linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Majd Dibbiny , Liran Liss , "Tzahi Oved (tzahio-VPRAkNaXOzVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org)" , "yishaih-VPRAkNaXOzVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org" List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 11:31:51AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 11:57:09AM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > The other take away from the Collab discussion is that there is a > > reasonable opinion that linux-rdma is not the right forum to decide if > > major changes to the multi-vendor common-verbs APIs are > > OK. I don't know if we reached a consensus on this or not. > > Who had that discussion, and why do you believe it's viable? In fact > I'd like to state that any other forum than linux-rdma simply is not > credible, just like the relevant list is the only credible place to > discuss the ABIs for any other Linux subsystem. I would say mostly from people looking at it from a hardware design perspective. The unique issue with verbs is that nearly all the APIs match directly to some feature in silicon, and cross-vendor silicon focused agreements are rarely done on Linux focused mailing lists. Particularly when these features are expected to be multi-operating system. That is my fundamental concern every time a uAPI change comes up: These proposed API changes *directly* require other vendors to implement very specific things in their sillicon. This is not a software-only discussion, as the majority of other Linux uAPI things are. * And I specifically separate the nitty gritty details of the API/ABI from the overarching ideas: eg, introducing a dis-aggregated QP concept with WQ objects, and defining it how that interacts with everything else. Jason -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html